Lessons in Chemistry

How can I give this any rating lower than 100%? I enjoyed this book way beyond my expectations.

Sometimes, a book is so good, I don't even want to give it a review because I'll be analyzing everything that's good about for ten paragraphs.

Regardless, here's a list of what I enjoyed about Lessons in Chemistry:

- The repeated themes and symbols - chemistry, rowing, phrases like “each day is new”, words like “recommit” are all used as reoccurring symbols and themes throughout the book and—unlike in many books and films where there is theme for the sake of theme—they add so much to the story. Plus, they're fun when you recognize them.
- Time shifts, scene breaks - The narrative often cuts between scenes like a movie—I love it when books use this method and use it effectively.
- Likeable characters - I won't spend four paragraphs analyzing how the author makes you instantly like the main characters.
- Purpose and meaning - some books incorporate politics simply to appeal to a certain group or the publisher required it or yadda yadda. But, in this book, the political undertones have meaning to the story. It is tightly intertwined with and enhances the story. Also, unlike many modern works of fiction, it keeps the political points related to the the story and characters instead of randomly breaking off into preachy speeches every once and a while. This book uses political stances as a way to enhance the story rather than trying to force the reader to agree.
- Historical references - the book takes place in the 60s, and the references are fun. Makes ya really “feel” the era
- The stakes feel very real. That's why I couldn't put my book/eReader down.
- This book is pretty emotional, but the humor gives it a light, almost teasing tone. I wouldn't call it satire, but the combination of humor, injustice, wit, and struggles that each page communicates just...results in a really captivating “tone”. I guess, what I'm trying to say is, this book has a great “voice”.
- I could go on and on...


As for negatives...

Ehm. I don't really have negatives. As both a Christian and someone who is very into science, I see the complex design of the universe to be a very convincing indication that a God exists, or at least that the world was created because, cmon, there's no way all of this came out of an accident or randomness. Therefore, I think although the book accurately portrays the delusional attitudes of people, especially “religious” people during the 60's who claimed to know God and yet only did so because it was the societal norm, and couldn't answer basic questions about the Bible and science, it also neglects the alternate scientific viewpoint that neither idea disproves the other.

So, I guess, my only negative reading the book was that every character, both religious and non-religous, acted like God and science were contradictory, even though the latter can be seen as evidence for an intelligent creator.

But, that's more of a pet peeve, and plus, I know that's not really the view the author was focusing on, and that's okay. When I read a book, I wanna see both sides, and the author still did a pretty good job of doing that.

So, I am not changing my rating of 5/5.